probably 500USD x70 part and 800USD x80part mid range GPU.Pascal experiment worked. Oh boy for next launch.
100% true.The milk tastes so sweet when you go from $129 GTS450/$149 GTX550 series to $249-299 1060, from $199-249 560/560Ti to $379-699 1070/1080. The usuals still are ignorant to NV GPU history using flawed arguments of comparing different generation flagship 780Ti to 2 generations newer 1060 in some twisted argument to justify how GP104 is not mid-range. If NV released GTX460/560/560Ti first and purposely held back GTX470/480/570/580, those GF1x4 cards would have been flagships/high end? What a joke of an argument. NV brand marketing BS at its finest.
By definition, the flagship GPU in a generation is the largest die and the fastest series of that generation. But NV knows a huge chunk of its customer base is blind and brand biased so why sell the flagship Kepler 780Ti, Maxwell 980Ti and Pascal 1080Ti when you can milk them 2-3 times in the sam generation with brilliant marketing (680->780->780Ti, then 980->980Ti, then 1080->1080Ti/2080Ti, etc.)
What used to be $350 GTX570 straight up became $1200 Titan X ePeen with double the VRAM of the "respective equivalent" 570 chip series. If NV launches 3328 CC 1080Ti for $699-799, this would be akin to releasing $289 560Ti 448 core.
Anyone who thinks NV didn't simply manipulate marketing names by changing GTX660/660Ti into 670/680 and kept going is delusional. Meh, thanks to mining I am chilling with multiple Polaris, Hawaii and Pascal cards. Oh, that sweet free milk, one day you will end but not before NV launches GP102 -- THE real Pascal flagship. I guess the loyalists who dropped $700 on mid-range 1080 can't handle the truth. It must be emotionally painful to admit one dropped $700 on an upper-mid-range videocard. Miners don't care for marketing BS since we got our cards for free.
Can't wait to see $139 GTX1050Ti turd outselling the far superior $165-169 RX 470 by magnitudes of times, further proving that brand and millions of dollars prevails above superior products. DongleBook Pro and Beats say hello to NV.
Good post, but comparisons are typically done year over year.when Nvidia saw a gigantic drop in units shipped because of the transition.
Good post, but comparisons are typically done year over year.
Money making is an art Nvidia excels at these days. If they can convince people to buy their products at higher than ever prices it's due to good marketing and performance that match expectations.
I'm impressed, wow
It is only about performance and power consumption. Shadowplay, lower CPU overhead in DX11, geforce experience, VR performance matter as well.On top of that, AMD helps them the best they can the last 2 years.
I mean NVIDIA released GTX 1050Ti a 75W TDP card at $139 and AMD instead of releasing a WX5100 75W TDP Polaris 10 desktop counterpart at $149 that would annihilate GTX 1050Ti, they just lowered the RX 470 prices.
NVIDIA wouldnt be able to release a Polaris 10 75W TDP competitor because they have the GTX 1050Ti at $139 and GTX 1060 3GB at $200. Releasing a 75W TDP GP106 would cannibalize its GTX 1050/Ti sales meaning they would sell a GP106 card lower decreasing their margins.
AMD is not aggressive the last years, they need to create a better product than NVIDIA in order to make a Woooowwww effect. A 75W Polaris 10 at $149 would be a big start for people starting speaking about AMDs perf/watt/$ again and recommend their cards against NVIDIA.
I mean they want to increase their market share but they dont compete in the high-End 75W territory, bad bad moves lately in that department.
It is only about performance and power consumption. Shadowplay, lower CPU overhead in DX11, geforce experience, VR performance matter as well.
Nobody pays attention to those in the $100-150 segment, except for Shadowplay perhaps. In the 75W TDP segment the vast majority of people care about perf/W and perf/$. DX-11 CPU overhead is non existence because you are always GPU limited with those cards. VR is not even a consideration for the 75W TDP $100-150 users.
AMD is not aggressive the last years, they need to create a better product than NVIDIA in order to make a Woooowwww effect
I think its combination of few factors:TY to all the Founders.
You're trying to reinterpret definitions here. A 780Ti still is a high end card from a few years ago that happens to have the same performance as a current mid range card. Mighty difference in wording here. You wouldn't relabel an old Corvette to "compact car" either just because one can get a current gen compact car with its performance.For example, a GTX 780 Ti was a "high end card" a few years ago.. What is it now? Midrange at best, when you look at the performance.
That I agree on. I'd rather say Nvidia removed the tri-/quad-SLI super enthusiast grade and instead moved their product stack up to fill that hole. The 1080 is not a small chip, it's right around the same size as G92. Chips larger than that had only been introduced with Fermi, which isn't that long ago.Same thing with a GTX 1080. A GTX 1080 to me is considered a high end card today because of its relevant performance, and NVidia's pricing reflects this. It cannot be considered a midrange product.
You're trying to reinterpret definitions here. A 780Ti still is a high end card from a few years ago that happens to have the same performance as a current mid range card. Mighty difference in wording here. You wouldn't relabel an old Corvette to "compact car" either just because one can get a current gen compact car with its performance.
stop posting the same boring wall of text over an over again...The milk tastes so sweet when you go from $129 GTS450/$149 GTX550 series to $249-299 1060, from $199-249 560/560Ti to $379-699 1070/1080. The usuals still are ignorant to NV GPU history using flawed arguments of comparing different generation flagship 780Ti to 2 generations newer 1060 in some twisted argument to justify how GP104 is not mid-range. If NV released GTX460/560/560Ti first and purposely held back GTX470/480/570/580, those GF1x4 cards would have been flagships/high end? What a joke of an argument. NV brand marketing BS at its finest.
By definition, the flagship GPU in a generation is the largest die and the fastest series of that generation. But NV knows a huge chunk of its customer base is blind and brand biased so why sell the flagship Kepler 780Ti, Maxwell 980Ti and Pascal 1080Ti when you can milk them 2-3 times in the sam generation with brilliant marketing (680->780->780Ti, then 980->980Ti, then 1080->1080Ti/2080Ti, etc.)
What used to be $350 GTX570 straight up became $1200 Titan X ePeen with double the VRAM of the "respective equivalent" 570 chip series. If NV launches 3328 CC 1080Ti for $699-799, this would be akin to releasing $289 560Ti 448 core.
Anyone who thinks NV didn't simply manipulate marketing names by changing GTX660/660Ti into 670/680 and kept going is delusional. Meh, thanks to mining I am chilling with multiple Polaris, Hawaii and Pascal cards. Oh, that sweet free milk, one day you will end but not before NV launches GP102 -- THE real Pascal flagship. I guess the loyalists who dropped $700 on mid-range 1080 can't handle the truth. It must be emotionally painful to admit one dropped $700 on an upper-mid-range videocard. Miners don't care for marketing BS since we got our cards for free.
Can't wait to see $139 GTX1050Ti turd outselling the far superior $165-169 RX 470 by magnitudes of times, further proving that brand and millions of dollars prevails above superior products. DongleBook Pro and Beats say hello to NV.
probably 500USD x70 part and 800USD x80part mid range GPU.
The milk tastes so sweet when you go from $129 GTS450/$149 GTX550 series to $249-299 1060, from $199-249 560/560Ti to $379-699 1070/1080. The usuals still are ignorant to NV GPU history using flawed arguments of comparing different generation flagship 780Ti to 2 generations newer 1060 in some twisted argument to justify how GP104 is not mid-range. If NV released GTX460/560/560Ti first and purposely held back GTX470/480/570/580, those GF1x4 cards would have been flagships/high end? What a joke of an argument. NV brand marketing BS at its finest.
By definition, the flagship GPU in a generation is the largest die and the fastest series of that generation. But NV knows a huge chunk of its customer base is blind and brand biased so why sell the flagship Kepler 780Ti, Maxwell 980Ti and Pascal 1080Ti when you can milk them 2-3 times in the sam generation with brilliant marketing (680->780->780Ti, then 980->980Ti, then 1080->1080Ti/2080Ti, etc.)
What used to be $350 GTX570 straight up became $1200 Titan X ePeen with double the VRAM of the "respective equivalent" 570 chip series. If NV launches 3328 CC 1080Ti for $699-799, this would be akin to releasing $289 560Ti 448 core.
Anyone who thinks NV didn't simply manipulate marketing names by changing GTX660/660Ti into 670/680 and kept going is delusional. Meh, thanks to mining I am chilling with multiple Polaris, Hawaii and Pascal cards. Oh, that sweet free milk, one day you will end but not before NV launches GP102 -- THE real Pascal flagship. I guess the loyalists who dropped $700 on mid-range 1080 can't handle the truth. It must be emotionally painful to admit one dropped $700 on an upper-mid-range videocard. Miners don't care for marketing BS since we got our cards for free.
Can't wait to see $139 GTX1050Ti turd outselling the far superior $165-169 RX 470 by magnitudes of times, further proving that brand and millions of dollars prevails above superior products. DongleBook Pro and Beats say hello to NV.
Exactly this! Anyone, ANYONE who thinks differently is unfortunately BLIND and too much of an Nvidia blind follower to use logic and reason to understand this simple and basic concept!
GTX 1070 should be today's midrange and should cost $250, the 1060 6GB should be $180, 1060 3GB should be $160, 1050ti should be $120 and 1050 should be $100. The GTX 1080 should be $350 and the 1080TI which will be released after Vega should be $500 with the Titan X being a premium card at $800-900.
Those are the real prices and real ranges of graphic cards.
stop posting the same boring wall of text over an over again...
amd went from $370 6970 to $550 7970 yet you didnt even mention it...why they did it? i mean they are the good guys right? why pricing the fury x $650 and not $370 as it should be according to you?
both company's try to make as much money as they can...but one is successful and the other dont..
dont look at marketing name.Look at SKU name.WHy would you say that, looking at the history of Nvidia gpu's and their prices, it should be around $400 for a x70 part and 250$ for mid range. Prices have been about the same for 5 or 6 years.
I went back and listed the prices of past gpu and their tier of performance. Now we can put this, "we are paying more " stuff to bed.
Super high end.
gtx 590 700$ March 2011
gtx 690 1000$ May 2012
Titan 1000$ March 2013,/ gtx780ti November 2013 ,700$
Titan X 1000$ March 2015, /gtx980ti June 2015 ,700$
Titan XP 1200$ August 2016
High end
gtx580 500$, November 2010
gtx680 500$ March 2012
gtx780 650$ June 2013
gtx980 550$ September 2014
gtx1080 650$ May 2016
lower high end
gtx570 350$ December 2010
gtx670 400$ May 2012
gtx770 400$ May 2013
gtx970 330$ September 2014 ,WOW! cheap
gtx1070 400$ June 2016
Mid range
gtx560ti 250$ January 2011
gtx660ti 300$ August 2012
gtx760 250$ June 2013
gtx960 220$ Jan 2015
gtx1060 250$ Aug 2016
If you bought nvda around Pascal's release date in May 2016, you'd be up about 50%.
dont look at marketing name.Look at SKU name.
GTX680 is GTX560TI successor
GTX980 is GTX560TI successor
GTX1080 is GTX560TI successor
GTX780TI is GTX580 successor
TITANX is GTX580 successor
FULL GP102 will be GTX580 successor(they selling cutdown sku for 1200USD now) no successor out yet.TITANXP is close to GTX570.BIG cutdown sku.Only its cut less this time.